a

PROGRESS OF THE REGIMENT:

00 A FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING STEPHEN CRANE'S0000THE RED BAD OF COURAGE

InN

A Thesis

Presented to

The Faculty of the Department of English

The College of William and Mary in Virginia

I > In Partial Fulfillment

./ Of the Requirements for the Degree of

Master of Arts

DTIC___ ___LECTE

AG28l99OM

by )Captain Timothy Brotherton

1990

I' .rTh .ON Sff2ir A

90 0

APPROVAL SHEET

This thesis is submitted in partial fulfilment of

the requirements for the degree of

Master of Arts

V~M#BW. t h ert

Approved, July 1990

f4 ctElsa Nettels

7 -

stopher MacGowan

Richard wry

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my appreciation to Professor Elsa Nettels for showing howmy personal (and rewarding) experiences with American soldiers could connect with myliterary investigations. I also appreciate the dedication and hard work of the essay's othertwo readers, Christopher MacGowan and Richard Lowry. And to Megan and Sandy, whoshowed me that the playground, the swing set and the sandbox, are just as important to aDad's education as they are to a child's. They reminded me that writing is most importantwhen it connects with a real life --that literature and history am useful only in the context ofour lives.

Accession For

OTIS- GRA&I oDTIC TAB 0Unaarouniced 0Justifltotlon

Availability CodesSTATEMENT "A" per Capt. Timothy Brothertor All And/orDept. Of English Aia/

Nest Point, NY 10996-1779 Diet Special

TELECON 8/27/90 VG (\

,iVg

Ii I | I I l I

ABSTRACT

At the center of both the novel and the scholarship of Stephen Crane's TheRBadge of Courage is the characterization of the protagonist Henry Fleming. Until the1960's most critics assumed that Henry matured, at least to some degree, and desciibed thenovel as a story of individual growth and initiation. More recently an increasing number ofcritics have found Henry's thoughts and actions to be consistently ironic and self-deluded.My discussion approaches Henry's maturity from a structural perspective.

Several scholars are concerned about elements of the novel which have beenoverlooked because of this critical concentration on either Henry Flcming or the novel'simagery. This has resulted in neglect for "significant aspects of the form and technique"says Inald Pizer.

N *his study will investigate one of these considerations of form: how Henry'sregiment serves as a major plot element, one that drives the forward action of the novel.The regiment is ever-present, either physically or at the center of Henry's thoughts (and seltrationalizations), it is one of the structural frames around which the novel is constructec.Henry's membership, as a green recruit in a newly formed and untried regiment, lcd byuntested officers, is at the crux of his experiences. During the two days of fighting, theregiment and many of its individuals mature rapidly. The regiment's progression, reflectedby the development of Henry's comrades, their regiment and its officers, demonstrates thatHenry's development is not just ironic self-delusion, but a realistic presentation of socialconsciousness and personal maturity. -!

iv

PROGRESS OF THE REGIMENT:

A FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING STEPHEN CRANE'S

THE RED BADGE OF COURAGE

2

For the soldiers of the Eleventh U.S. Corps, behind the main Federal positions at

Chancellorsville, the first warning of "Stonewall" Jackson's rear attack came not from the

Confederate lines, says Corps Commander General Oliver Howard, but when "like a cloud

of dust driven before a spring shower appeared the startled rabbits, squirrels, quail and

other game flying wildly hither and thither in evident terror." They were followed, narrates

Harry Hansen in his book The.Ci.L.Wa , by the gray coated Confederates, who crashed

out of the woods everywhere and with "that screech known as the rebel yell" crushed the

extended lines (308). These are probably the most significant moments of the battle of

Chancellorsville. And it is at Chancellorsville that Stephen Crane places the protagonist of

his The Red Badge of Courage, Henry Fleming, to confront his fear of the red swollen

face of battle, and to receive his "red badge of courage." 1

How well Henry faces this test of courage remains a major concern for the scholars

of Crane's novel. Critics have long argued over the difficulty of knowing what Crane's

relationship is to his protagonist at the novel's close. Is the youth's estimate of himself as

a "man" accurate, or is it just another ironic depiction of his own self-delusion? Or is

Crane's characterization of Henry "consciously or unconsciously ambivalent?" 2 Some

critics believe that Henry does mature, at least to some degree; they find the novel one of

individual growth and initiation. But recently most critics have concluded that Henry's

thoughts and actions are consistently ironic and self-deluded. 3

Donald Pizer, in his article "Crane: A Guide to Criticism," reviews some of the

shortcomings of the novel's scholarship. He argues that a neglected aspect of The Red

Badge of Courage is an analysis of the overall structure of the novel.

A good many of the significant aspects of the form and technique of TheReBadg of Cogra= have either been totally neglected or only tentatively sketched,perhaps because critical preoccupation with the imagery of the novel has obscuredthe need to examine other formalistic problems. (156)

3

One structural frame of The Red Badge of Courage is the military organizations to

which Henry belongs. It is impossible to separate an individual's experience from the

context of his unit's forward progression. The unit's progression serves in turn to mirror

the individual's growth and maturity. At the heart of Henry's experiences in his "various

battles" as a green recruit is his participation as a member of a newlyformed and untied

mgini led by untested officers. Attention to the progression of the regiment, illustrated

by the progression of both the individual members and the corporate whole, demonstrates

that Henry's development is not just a portrait of ironic self-delusion, but a convincing

presentation of social consciousness and personal maturity.

I

Many implications of the regiment's progression are made explicit in the proposed

sources of The Red Badge of Courage. Because Crane was so young (and had not seen

war), searching for what might have influenced him has been a major element of Crane

scholarship. Pizer says that this search for literary sources was a once "active field" which

had the intention of establishing a "major source" for the novel (151). Early studies

proposed European writers as the dominat influence for the work. For example Lars

Ahnebrink cited similarities to Emile Zola's L Dbacle and to Leo Tolstoy's Sebasw~I

Sketches. 4

But most critics have looked towards Civil War novels as the major source for "he

RcdZBdg. One of the earliest, and influential essays of this type is H.T. Webster's

"William F. Hinman's Crml Si KIgg and Stephen Crane's The Red Badge f

Cogg." Webster argues that "nearly everything that makes up Thm Red Badgof

gwg exists at least in germ" (286) in Hinman's novel, Cororal Si Klegg and His Pard

(1887). In both novels the protagonists are green recruits who enlist in -. la

against parental wishes, because of patriotic rhetoric. Both are prone to romantic "self-

4

dramatization" (Webster 286) and develop from raw farm boys to hardened veterans

through field experiences. Both men are anxious about their personal courage, both are

proven in battle by seizing a flag from a falling color bearer, and both are praised for

heroism by their colonels. 5 At first look these were persuasive plot parallels, until, as

Wertheim shows, the novel had significant plot similarities to many other Civil War novels

(61-2). Eric Solomon argues that Joseph Khiands The Captain of CompanyK is an

analogue of The Red Badge of Courae, while Thomas ODonnell makes a case for John

William De Forest's novel Miss Ravenel's Conversion (featuring gritty realism in its battle

scenes). 6 While in each case there are impressive parallels, there is no proof that Crane

read any of these novels. There are also a number of "personal narratives" or memoirs of

Union army veterans which contain similar parallels to the fictional accounts.

Stanley Wertheim notes, in his essay "The Red Badge of Coura and Personal

Narratives of the Civil War," that "narrative reminiscences" by Union veterans were

published with increasing frequency in the 1870's and 1880's. He characterizes these

personal chronicles as "semi-fictional but graphically realistic, that traced the adventnres of

a young recruit from the time of his enlistment through his battle experiences, uually aa

member of a particular brigade or regiment" (61 my emphasis). Wertheim's main concern

is the lack of critical recognition of a "distinctive literary convention for Civil War

narratives, embodied in literally dozens of exemplars," which was "established during

Crane's formative years" and which he "must have been thoroughly familiar with" (61).

Wertheim contends that Crane "originally conceived of Th Red., dm as an outgrowth of

this genre" [of personal narratives] (61).

Wertheim's discussion of these personal narratives provides evidence that Crane

incorporated the "autobiographical" tradition of these memoirs into his novel. Several of

Wertheim's examples, such as Alonzo F. Hill's Our Boys: The Personal Experience of a

5

Soldier in the Arry of the Potomac (1864), contain at least as many sinilarities to Ile Rd

Ba as CoW Si KIM_. 7

The common elements of these personal narratives which are also found in the

major plot elements of Crane's novel include: patriotic fervor as a cause to enlist, heroic

fantasies of war, parental opposition to the enlistment, doubts about personal courage,

anxiety over the confusion and purposelessness of troop movements, denunciation of field

officers, ghastly sights of the dead or dreadful processions of the wounded, and officer's

use of swords to keep the men in the firing lines. 8 According to Wertheim these

"chronicles" usually involved the "maturation theme of a recruit into veteran through an

entire military campaign of a reiment or brigade" (64 my emphasis).

Wertheim's thesis is echoed by Daniel Aaron's The Unwritten War: American

Writers and the Civil War. Both suggest that Crane was drawing not from a single source,

but from a genre of narratives which showed the experiences of a Civil War recruit. Pizer

agrees, observing that the tendency today in I1eRd. Baidg criticism is to "deemphasize

the importance of sources." Yet it is useful, he says, to "acknowledge the ...different

threads of influence without stressing one or the other" (151). Like Wertheim and Aaron,

Pizer believes that there were "enough unromanticized portrayals of the trials of the recruit

in Civil War personal narratives, art, and photography to supply a foundation for Crane's

own rejection of the conventions of the popular Civil War romance" ("Review of

Scholarship" 136).

From this it seems likely that Crane drew many of his plot elements from Civil War

narratives. Since there are so many plot elements in common between these narratives,

both fictional and non-fictional, it seems counterproductive to attempt to isolate a single

major source. Perhaps it was the very frequency of appearance of some of these situations

that appealed to Crane, as a method of insuring a gripping portrayal of something he had

not personally experienced. For my purposes, the most important of these common plot

6

elements is the association of the recruit's experience with that of his equally inexperienced

comrades, their regiment and officers. From the unusually large number of examples in

which individuals mature in the context of a unit, it appears that this theme is, to a degree, a

formula of Civil War narration.

II

The importance of his unit to Henry's development and safety is first mentioned by

his mother. Instead of supporting his romantic misconceptions of war as a "Greek-like

struggle," she undercuts his notions of individual "prowess" (7).

"You watch out, Henry, an' take good care of yerself in this here fightingbusiness- .... Don't go a-thinkin' you can lick the hull rebel army at thestart, because yeh can't. Yer jest one little feller amongst a hull lot of others,and yeh've got to keep quiet an' do what they tell yeh." (8)

While she "doggedly peeled potatoes," she continues "that yeh must never do no

shirking" and "don't think of anything 'cept what's right" (9). Her speech, irritating to

him, reinforces the importance of the group over the individual for their mutual protection.

The romantic notions of war must be put aside for the realities of combat in the gunpowder

age. Warren Anderson, in his discussion of "Homer and Stephen Crane," argues that the

"novel as a whole provides an extended refutation" of Henry's romantic illusions (83), of

individual "throat-grappling," full of glory, battCs "extravagant in color, lurid with

breathless deeds" (Red Badge 7). Anderson believes that the days of individual (Epic-like)

heroics have passed, and that Henry will be in "an infantry battle where men must stand

together against the enemy. The group effort counts for everything, and selflessness-...

has become the highest virtue" (84). 9

Henry initially has only an imperfect understanding of this requirement of unit

integrity and discipline which promotes the common good. In his first two skirmishes he

feels the pressure both from his personal illusions about "individual" battle, and from the

requirements of the unit for corporate unity and discipline. One of his illusions is the

7

dehumanization of the enemy and war. His earliest impressions of battle are captured by a

personification of the enemy and combat as a mechanized process. Just before Henry runs

from the firing line, he begins to "exaggerate the endurance, the skill, and the valor of

those who were coming." He thought "they must be machines of steel" (36). Later, just

before joining the column of wounded, Henry is drawn towards the front. '"The battle was

like the grinding of an immense and terrible machine to him.... [the] grim processes,

fascinated him. He must go close and see it produce corpses" (43). It is not by chance

that the best infantry units have always been characterized by their machine-like precision

in drill. Many armies have been victorious (and therefore effective at savini, their own

lives) by the superiority of their battle drills. 10 Unity, discipline, and precision of tactics

are critical to success. Initially Henry recognizes this trait in the enemy, but not its

importance to him personally.

A function of Henry's inabliry to understand the role of discipline and unit integrity

can be found in his belonging to a green, inexperienced organization. Joseph Conrad

explains that the importance of Henry's regiment being an untried unit is that it cannot

immediately teach him the importance of discipline and teamwork.

Stephen Crane places his Young Soldier in an untried regiment. And this is wellcontrived.... In order that the revelation should be complete, the Young Soldierhas to be deprived of moral support which he would have found in a tried bodyof men matured in achievement to the consciousness of its worth. (192)

It is important, then, that Henry is placed in an untried unit so that the individual

can mirror the experience of the group and vice versa. Historical accuracy is another

reason to put the protagonist in an untried regiment. Unlike the Southern armies who

integrated their replacements into veteran organizations to maintain similar structures and

personnel fill rates, the Army of the Potomac did not replace losses from its regiments--

they recruited new regiments (all green) and assigned them to Brigades/Divisions which

were under strength. As a result "veteran regiments... were likely to be very small

aggregations of men" (20). In TeRdgu, when one regiment sees the 304th New

8

York they ask: "Hey fellers, what brigade is that?" When told that it was one regiment, not

a brigade (of 2 to 6 regiments) they "laughed, and said, '0 Gawd!'" (20). While Henry is

considering his ability under fire, the veteran regiments are questioning the ability of the

large (but ineffective) fresh regiment with so many new recruits. As Wertheim's

autobiographical narratives indicate, there is an implicit correlation between the

effectiveness of the individuals and the effectiveness of the uniL By placing Henry in an

untried regiment, Crane can create a parallel experience between the progression of the

individuals and their organization.

Reinforcing this correspondence between an untried unit and its individual soldiers

are a number of associations that the narrator and members of Henry's regiment make.

After crossing the pontoon bridges the column stops. "Presently the army again sat down

to think" and Henry stops too, considering "his theory of a blue demonstration" (21). The

army is personified as a thinking man, and Henry is simultaneously linked to that same

action. When the new regiment prepares to receive its first enemy attack, a general shows

up, savagely telling the Regimental Commander twice: "You've got to hold 'em back!"

while shaking his fist in the Colonel's face. The Colonel answers, stammering in

agitation. Then after "scold[ing] like a wet parrot" the Colonel regards "his men in a highly

resentful manner, as if he regretted above everything his association with them" (30). The

General clearly identifies Colonel MacChesnay's "worth" with the regiment's ability to

hold the attack back. And it is only possible for the Colonel to "regret" his association if he

feels that same link between himself and the unit. The next day, when Lt Hasbrouck, new

company commander, comments on Henry's wild fighting even after the enemy has

disappeared, he says: "By heavens, if I had ten thousand wild cats like you I could tear th'

stomach outa this war in less'n a week!" (81). The use of the first person pronoun is

instructive. The accomplishments (and failures) of his company reflect directly on his

personal worth.

9

Even Henry makes a direct correspondence between himself and how the unit

should act. When he flees the enemy "machines of steel," the "onslaught of redoubtable

dragons," he runs on "mingled with others. He dimly saw men on his right and on his left"

and heard footsteps behind him. "He thought that all the regiment was fleeing" (36-7).

When he rationalizes later that "he had proceeded according to very correct and

commendable rules" and that his actions "had been full of strategy" then he reasons that all

the others must have also done the intelligent thing, and fled. When he discovers that they

stayed to fight, it was their "blind ignorance and stupidity" that had "betrayed him" (39-

40). It is an automatic, almost unconscious association and linkage in his mind that if he

and some of the new recruits should run, then naturally all of the corresponding new

recruits in the regiment would also run. While this argument is motivated by Henry's self-

rationalization for his desertion, it illustrates his belief that there should be a

correspondence between the individu-I,'s actions and those of the corporate whole.

The maturation of an individual within the corporate body of his military

organization is both a common and highly organic process. It is impossible to separate the

individual from his context. Combat experience is based on group experiences. While

combat can be very lonely, the soldicr's development has its basis in his view of the group.

An individual can only measure his performance against the experiences, seen or narrated,

of other individuals and groups. The new soldier progresses at the same time that the unit

is charging: new soldiers, new leaders, veterans returning, and new experiences and

situations, all create an incalculable relationship of flux between the charting of the

individual and the unit. This makes it impossible to separate the progress of individual

soldiers without a discussion of the experiences of their unit, since that forms the

foundation of the individual's understanding of battle.

The progress of a unit, in this case a regiment, to the eventual status of a veteran

organization is of natural interest to a writer of realistic narratives. It is neither a swift nor

easy process. It might take only a few skirmishes during one campaign-- but usually it will

10

encompass many battles. As Wertheim's study of personal narratives shows, the unit's

progression offers a ready-made plot sequence for battlefield memoirs, an important plot

formula. The military service is very disorienting, changes occur at an accelerated pace,

and socialization of new members is both constant and unrelenting. Even a few months

make a large difference in what each man knows about how the unit operates. Any veteran

who remembers his first days will always do it with the hindsight of how little he knew or

understood. Because of this, accounts of military service are normally going to contain a

movement towards experience and understanding. All of the possible sources already

listed (both fictional and more purely autobiographical), contain to some degree this

process of maturation from recruit to veteran, both individually and within a unit that

simultaneously improves.

In the regiment's first battle in Crane's novel, the predominant descriptions are

naturally of Henry, but from them we can determine something about the regiment as a

whole. His first skirmish gives Henry a brief taste of the importance of corporate unity

within military organizations. He "work[ed] his weapon like an automatic affair." Losing

"concern for himself.... he became not a man but a member." He feels "welded into a

common personality which was dominated by a single desire" and could not flee any "more

than a little finger can commit a revolution from a hand" (30). Henry feels "the subtle

battle brotherhood more potent even than the cause for which they were fighting. It was a

mysterious fraternity born of the smoke and danger of death." He is described as "at a

task... like a carpenter." He is a member of a group, gathering support from the actions of

the others in the group. "Following this came a red rage" (3 1). Then Crane describes the

soldiers that Henry can see around him.

There was a blare of heated rage mingled with a certain expression of intentness onall faces. Many of the men were making low-toned noises with their mouths, and

these subdued cheers, snarls, imprecations, prayers, made a wild, barbaric songthat went as an undercurrent of sound, strange, and chantlike with the resoundingchords of the war march. (3 1)

11

It seems reasonable that the unit as a group feels the same, or at least experiences a

feeling of "rage" similar to Henry's.

There was a singular absence of heroic poses. The men bending and surging intheir haste and rage were in every impossible attitude.... The flaps of the cartridgeboxes were all unfastened, and bobbed idiotically with each movement. The rifles,once loaded, were jerked to the shoulder and fired without aim into the smoke or atone of the blurred and shifting forms. (32)

These comments are impossible to attribute only to the narrator- they could be seen

and filtered by Henry's own feelings-- yet it seems very likely that the other soldiers feel a

similar bond of brotherhood, "working at task" as a "member." They are part of the

regiment which "was like a firework" which when "once ignited, proceeds superior to

circumstances until its blazing vitality fades. It wheezed and banged with a mighty power"

(31). Once the enemy skirmish line is driven back, "an exultant yell went along the

quivering line.... Some in the regiment began to whoop frenziedly" (32-3). There are

sociable greetings and handshakes, and exuberance and self-satisfaction. Again, the men

he had known had features which "were familiar, but with whom the youth now felt the

bonds of tied hearts" (34).

Immediately the enemy reforms to attack again. As the regiment prepares for the

next fight, Crane personifies the organization as a body: "The sore joints of the regiment

creaked as it painfully floundrered into position to repulse" (35). The firing starts again

"somewhere nn the regimental line and ripped along in both directions. The level sheets of

flame developed great clouds of smoke" (35). This narration contains a similar choice of

words and descriptive patterns to the previous narration of the regiment firing, indicating

that for most of the men the second fight is similar to the first-- but for others, like Henry,

it is not- because they cannot resume the collective "task" of fighting in the group. While

most were again fruing, Henry's eyes have a "look" of a "jaded horse" and his hands are

too "large and awkward as if he was wearing invisible mittens. And there was a great

uncertainty About his knee joints" (35). For the regiment it is "painful" to resume fighting,

12

but for Henry it is impossible.

No longer functioning as a member, he "waited in a sort of a horrified, listening

attitude" waiting to be "gobbled" up by the "redoubtable dragons." As several men run, he

soon follows them, with the delusion that it was "the regiment [that] was leaving him

behind" (36). We soon find out that the line has held. After Henry returns to the regiment

that night, he is told by Corporal Simpson that the company had lost forty-two men, but

many were now showing up. Wilson comments the next morning: "Th' reg'ment lost over

half th' men yestirday.... I thought 'a course they was all dead, but laws, they kep' a-

comin' back last night until it seems, after all, we didn't lose but a few" (71). The

regiment had held, with the support of the veteran regiments on each flank and later with

the support of another reserve brigade (38), but with difficulty due to its large loss of men

to desertion. Jim Conklin's prediction was a roughly accurate description of how the

regiment would do on its first day.

"Oh, there may be a few of 'em run, but there's them kind in every regiment,'specially when they first goes under fire.... Of course they ain't never been underfire yet, and it ain't likely they'll lick the hull rebel army all-to-oncet the first time;

but I think they'll fight better than some, if worse than others. That's the way Ifigger... the boys come of good stock, and most of 'em '1 fight like sin after theyoncet git shootin'." (12-3)

Those individuals who were involved in the unit's task of fighting, who resumed

the group effort in the second skirmish, stayed. Those, like Henry, who fled, could not

yet identify their own safety with that of the group. They were not ready for the unselfish

(and ultimately safer) sacrifice of immersion within the group identity. So in spite of his

first experience, where he is "not a man but a member" and is "welded into a common

personality" (30) for which he comes to feel the "bonds of tied hearts" (34), Henry has

maintained his old illusions that individual action is more important than group

cooperation. He rationalizes that it is "the duty of every little piece to rescue itself" on its

own recognition of danger, for if he did not "then, where would be the army?" (39).

13

On the second day, the regiment, after some more seemingly purposeless moving

around, ends up again defending against a Rebel attack. Henry begins to "fume with rage

and exasperation" (78). The machine-like enemy "seemed never to grow weary." Henry

"had a wild hate for the relentless foe. Yesterday, when he had imagined the universe to be

against him, he had hated it, little gods and big gods" but "today he hated the army of the

foe with the same great hatred" (79). Gregory Zilboorg's discussion of troop morale in

World War Two, which is quoted in the article "From Rifleman to Flagbearer" by Kermit

Vanderbilt and Daniel Weiss, can explain the significance of Henry's anger.

It is a well-observed fact that 'green' troops become 'seasoned' as soon as theybecome angry-- that is, as soon as they begin to convert their fear of death intohatred and aggression.... It is the mechanism of revenge, of overcoming death bymeans of murder, that proves here too the most potent psychological force.(Vanderbilt 288)

While I am not sure that this is a "fact," it does chart the normal process that many

soldiers progress through during their baptism of fire. Not only Henry, but much of the

regiment has begun to feel the same angry rage against the enemy. "Te regiment roared

forth in sudden and valiant retort." The thick smoke "was furiously slit and slashed by the

knifelike fire from the rifles" (79). To Henry, the other men around him "resembled

animals tossed for a death struggle into a dark pit. There was a sensation that he and his

fellows, at bay, were pushing back, always pushing fierce onslaughts of creatures" (79).

The defending regiment now seems to be striking out at the enemy instead of only trying to

keep them back, pushing back furiously against the intrusions. The regiment has taken a

second important step in the road to becoming seasoned troops, but they will soon find out

that attacking is even more difficult than defending.

In their first attack, the courage of the men and the leadership provided by Lt.

Hasbrouck, Fleming and Wilson is not enough to overcome the enemy. At first, "the

straining pace ate up the energies of the men" and with the loss of breath comes "a return to

caution" (87). '"The men stood, their rifles slack in their hands, and watched the regiment

dwindle" (87). The lieutenant's roaring has no effect, but finally Wilson's "angry shot at

14

the persistent woods.., awakened the men. They huddled no more like sheep" They fire,

and start forward, "unevenly with many jolts and jerks" (88). The enemy is a "flaming

opposition in their front [which] grew with their advance" until "all forward ways were

barred." The "whole affair seemed incomprehensible to many of them" (88). When the

color sergeant is killed, Henry and Wilson jump for the flag, and as Henry turns with it, he

sees that "the regiment had crumbled away" and the "dejected remnant was coming slowly

back" with their forces "expended" (90). The officers are finally able to "beat the mass into

a proper circle to face the menaces" and when the smoke clears the lieutenant sees an

advancing enemy force moving very close by. His warning is "lost in a roar of wicked

thunder from the men's rifles." Henry's regiment is "intent with the despair of their

circumstances and they seized upon the revenge to be had at close range. Their thunder

swelled loud and valiant" (93). This successful little battle, when they were "on the verge

of submission," had "showed" them that they could fight well (94).

The impetus of enthusiasm was theirs again. They gazed about them withlooks of uplifted pride, feeling new trust in the grim, always confident weaponsin their hands. And they were men. (94)

Many critics read this "and they were men" as another example of the soldier's

(indivdual and collective) propensity for self-delusion. I disagree. They must return to

their lines, receiving the jeering abuse of the veterans for failure to reach their objective, but

the statement reflects the emotional state of the unit. They have learned about the

importance of unit cohesion and morale from their first attack, and their actions for the rest

of the novel bear out their changed mental state. Their knowledge came at the end of the

charge, and so they must be reminded by the veterans of their failures to achieve tangible

results. But their subsequent actions indicate that their new feelings do reflect an accurate

understanding and acceptance of the need for unified action in order to be successful. And

in their next battle they indeed do "fight well."

When "a formidable line of die enemy came within dangerous range" the men

"threw up their rifles and fired a plumping volley at the foes"; though "there had been no

15

order given, the men upon recognizing the menace, had immediately let drive their flock of

bullets" (101). When the colonel comes running along the back of the line yelling, "We

must charge'm!" there is no "rebellion against this plan" as the colonel anticipated.

Surprisingly "they were giving quick and unqualified expressions of assent" and their

bayonets give "an ominous, clanging overture to the charge" (102). The men recognize the

military necessity to drive the enemy from the fence. To remain would be death, and to

retreat would be to "exalt" those who had denigrated their new found confidence. "At the

yelled wcids of command the soldiers sprang forward in eager leaps" (102). Henry's

yelling from the front was "urging on those that did not need to be urged" for the men were

"again grown suddenly wild with an enthusiasm of unselfishness" (103).

The "incredible selflessness" which Anderson says is "the highest virtue" in this

kind of "infantry battle" (84) has now become the standard for Henry's regiment. The

attack is successful. The enemy either "retired stubbornly" or were quickly killed or taken

prisoner. The men now respond to their duties, not as individuals but unselfishly for the

benefit of the unit. They have lost the illusions of war, they recognize the importance of

the unit over the individual, and are better for their knowledge. They have taken the enemy

regiment's flag, which is a significant achievement. The regiment has remason to be proud,

they have become "seasoned" during the battle, they fought "better than some, if worse

than others" and have gained invaluable experiences. Their final charge has proven that

"they could fight well" and were now a valuable member in the Army of the Potomac.

Probably, they will still get some good-natured harassment from the veterans, but their self-

confidence will now allow them to take it in stride, proud of their achievements. While it is

not realistic to expect one battle to make them fully nmtured veterans, they seem to be on

the right path.

16

Ill

The development of the regiment, from a green untried unit to its beginnings as a

veteran organization, is paralleled by the growth and mi.:turity of its two major officers--

new company commander Lieutenant Hasbrouck and regimental commander Colonel

MacChesnay. Once again the context of these officer's experiences is inseparable from the

regiment's common experience. How well the officers do is a reflection of how well the

regiment is doing.

The first view of officers in the novel (both in general and of the two central ones)

is a denunciation which is filtered by Henry's consciousness. When the army fails to

move out promptly after Jim Conklin's prediction of a flanking campaign, Henry is in no

way relieved, but "on the contrary," found the wait "an irritating prolongation" (13). He

concludes that "the only way to prove himself was to go into the blaze, and then

figuratively to watch his legs to discover their merits and faults" (14). As the days pass,

the "great anxiety" in "his heart was continually clamoring at what he considered the

intolerable slowness of the generals." Because "he wanted it settled forthwith" his "anger

at the commanders reached an acute stage, and he grumbled about the camp like a veteran"

(15). As already mentioned, the denunciation of field officers is a common characteristic

of the Civil War personal narratives; in this case the denunciations reflect Henry's fear of

cowardice and his desire to "settle" it

quickly, and is not a reasonable criticism of his chain of command.

Henry's anger only increses the closer the regiment gets to a fight. Early on the

morning that his corps finally begins to move, Henry stands in ranks, watching the first

glow of sunrise.

17

In the gloom before the break of day their uniforms glowed a deep purple hue.From across the river the red eyes were still peering. In the eastern sky there

was a yellow patch like a rug laid for the feet of the coming sun; and against it,black and patternlike, loomed the gigantic figure of the colonel on a gigantichorse. (15)

As he waits, Henry "grew impatient," finding it "unendurable the way these affairs were

managed." He wonders "how long they were to be kept waiting" (15). The red fires of

the enemy camp across the river seem to be the eyes of a monster, and he "conceived them

to be growing larger, as the orbs of a row of dragons advancing." When he turns towards

the colonel, he sees "him lift his gigantic arm and calmly stroke his mustache" (15). A

rider gallops up to the colonel, there is a "short, sharp-worded conversation"; then as the

new rider leaves, he calls out: "'Don't forget that box of cigars!"' Henry wonders "what a

box of cigars had to do with war" (15). In this exchange, the simple act of the regiment

waiting for its turn to take the road and a possible cigar wager becomes, in Henry's

opinion, an instance of poor leadership. Henry sees in the colonel, as an authority figure,

an obstacle to his getting his problem "settled forthwith." So the colonel is pictured

"patternlike" as a "gigantic figure" on a "gigantic horse" who lifts "his gigantic arm" to

"calmly stroke his mustache." For Henry's overactive imagination, the colonel becomes a

sort of "gigantic" foe, blocking his path, who is "managing" this "affair" in such an

"unendurable" way. The resentment resulting from his lack of control causes Henry

naturally, but unfairly, to blame the authority figure-- who assumes a larger than life

dimension. And a minor personal affair, over a box of cigars, becomes a symbol for the

whole pattern of mismanagement that Henry accuses his chain of command of. This

pattern of denunciation of his officers as a result of personal fears or private rationalization

continues for most of the novel.

Several days later, Henry finds himself running down a road towards the sound of

gunfire. He feels "inclosed" by the surrounded regiment; "he was in a moving box." He

thinks he is being "dragged by the merciless government..., taking him out to be

slaughtered" (21). While Henry is crossing some open fields, skirted by woods, "absurd

18

ideas took hold of him" (23). He sees the enemy in every shadow: "The swift thought

came to him that the generals did not know what they were about. It was all a trap." As he

considers his tragic condition and the stupidity of his officers, he lags behind. Lieutenant

Hasbrouck begins to beat him "heartily" with the flat of his sword, talking to him in a

"loud and insolent voice." Regaining ranks, Henry decides that he "hated the lieutenant

who had no appreciation of fine minds. He was a mere brute" (23). Here Henry makes an

immediate mental transfer from the incompetence of the generals to the lack of

understanding of his company's officers.

Henry's denunciation of his officers is modulated by several other brief

perspectives. After Henry complains about all the seemingly purposeless counter

marching, the loud soldier Wilson agrees:

"It ain't right. I tell you if anybody with any sense was a-runnin' this army it---""Oh, shut up!" roared the tall private. "You little fool. You little damn' cuss.You ain't had that there coat and them pants on for six months, and yet you talkas if---" (25)

Conklin points out that privates seldom know the point or importance of any military

movement It can be frustrating to be constantly moving around, and never (seemingly)

get to the fighting; and it is natural to blame the authority figures for it, but that alone does

not make it legitimate criticism for inexperienced privates.

After returning over the same ground that afternoon, the brigade halts in the edge of

a grove with the battle raging on the forward right flank. The narration at this point

becomes a page long list of unattributed comments from the soldiers as they are waiting.

Apparently, it represents what Henry is overhearing from the line of comrades, including:

"That young Hasbrouck, he makes a good oftcer. He ain't afraid 'a nothin' (27). For at

least some of the men, Hasbrouck is not a "mere brute." This indicates

that many of Henry's opinions can be considered suspect and should be taken ironically.

When the lieutenant is shot in the hand during this first skirmish:

19

He began to swear so wondrously that a nervous laugh went along the regimentalline. The officer's profanity sounded conventional. It relieved the tightened

senses of the new men. It was as if he had hit his fingers with a tack hammer athome.

He held the wounded member carefully away from his side so that theblood would not drip upon his trousers. (27-8)

When the company commander tries to help bind the wound, the two argue over "how the

binding should be done" (28). The scene introduces the lieutenant's constant swearing and

its role as a method of motivating and reassuring the men. It also shows his rather

immature concern (considering the situation) over not soiling his uniform.

Colonel MacChesnay also acts poorly during this first skirmish. After "Saunder's"

brigade is "crushed" (28) and driven in, to the jeering catcalls of the veteran regiments on

either flank, there is the exchange between him and an angry general who rides up.

A hatless general pulled his dripping horse to a stand near the colonel of the 304th.He shook his fist in the other's face. "You've got to hold 'em back!" he shouted,savagely; "you've got to hold 'em back!"

In his agitation the colonel began to stammer. "A-all r-right, General, allright, by Gawd! We-we'll do our-- we-we'll d-d-do-- do our best, General." Thegeneral made a passionate gesture and galloped away. The colonel, perchance torelieve his feelings, began to scold like a wet parrot. The youth, turning swiftly tomake sure that the rear was unmolested, saw the commander regarding his men in ahighly resentful manner, as if he regretted above everything his association withthem. (30)

Colonel MacChesnay identifies himself with the regiment, but not in a favorable

light. He regrets the association, because he is anxious that they will not be able to hold

against the enemy, and that he will be blamed for their failure.

As the attack reaches its crescendo, the officers are standing behind the firing line,

"bobbing to and fro, roaring directions and encouragements. The dimensions of their

howls were extraordinary. They expended their lungs with prodigal wills" (32).

lieutenant Hasbrouck stops one soldier who had "fled screaming at the first volley."

The man was blubbering and staring with sheeplike eyes at the lieutenant, who hadseized him by the collar and was pommeling him. He drove him back into theranks with many blows. The soldier went mechanically, dully, with his animal-likeeyes upon the officer. Perhaps there was to him a divinity expressed in the voice ofthe other-- stem, hard, with no reflection of fear in it. He tried to reload his gun,but his shaking hands prevented. The lieutenant was obliged to assist him. (32)

20

For this soldier at least, the lieutenant might have some "divinity in his voice" so "stern"

and "hard," without any "reflection of fear in it." This "little isolated scene" foreshadows

the unsuccessful attempt that Hasbrouck will make to keep Henry from fleeing the next

skirmish, in just a few minutes. But Henry will certainly not recognize any "divinity" in

the voice of this "mere brute." The scene suggests that there are other perspectives of the

lieutenant (and of battle fear) than Henry's. That other soldiers do not blame the officers to

the same extent as Henry, helps to modulate our view of them. It is also important in light

of the growing connection that will be made between Henry and Hasbrouck on the second

day of the fighting.

After Henry flees the firing line, he feels "wronged" (39) when he discovers that

the line has held. He "grew bitter over" the "blind ignorance and stupidity of those little

pieces," his comrades, who "had withstood the blows and won" (39). Temporarily,

Henry transfers his anger at the officers to his comrades. "A dull, animal-like rebelion

against his fellows, war in the abstract, and fate grew within him" (40). Later, during his

self rationalization, he hopes that the army will lose the battle, in order to vindicate his

decision to run. He felt "no compunctions for proposing a general as a sacrifice.... could

center no direct sympathy" (56) for him. He felt "it would be very unfortunate... but in

this case a general was of no consequence to the youth" because a defeat "would be a

roundabout vindication of himself" (57). At this point, Henry's denunciation of officers

reflects his own agitated mental condition and his isolation from his chain of command

moe than it is a reasonable discussion of their leadership shortcomings in combat.

Henry's acceptance of his mistake in running, necessitated by his return that night

to the regiment, does not break him of his blaming the generals for all of the army's (and

his own) problems. The next morning, he boldly says: "'B'jiminey, we're generaled by a

lot 'a lunkheads.'" He is unable to "restain himself" from "a long and intricate

denunciation of the commander of the forces" (75). Though he is "secr-tly dumfounded"

21

when this "sentiment... came from his lips," and he looks around "guiltily," he cannot

stop.

,"Well, then, if we fight like the devil an' don't ever whip, it must be the general'sfault," said the youth grandly and decisively. "And I don't see any sense infighting and fighting and fighting, yet always losing through some derned oldlunkhead of a general."

A sarcastic man who was tramping at the youth's side, then spoke lazily."Mebbe yeh think yeh fit th' hull battle yestirday, Fleming," he remarked. (76)

This "speech pierced the youth," the "chance words" reducing "him to an abject pulp." For

a brief time he becomes a "modest person" (76). Although Henry recognizes that his tirade

is foolish, he cannot stop. It is either self rationalization or an attempt to hide his own

regretful behavior on the day before.

As he gains experience, Lieutenant Hasbrouck becomes an increasing effective

leader. While the unit waits for the next attack, the Hasbrouck "strode to and fro with dark

dignity in the rear of his men" (77). He acts quickly to suppress rumors and unnecessary

talk that might hurt morale.

"You boys shut right up! There no need 'a your wastin' your breath in long-winded arguments about this an' that an' th' other. You've been jawin' like a lot 'aold hens. All you've got t' do is to fight, an' you'll get plenty 'a that t' do in aboutten minutes. Less talkin' an' more fightin' is what's best for you boys. I neversaw sech gabbling jackasses."

He paused, ready to pounce upon any man who might have the temerity toreply. No words being said, he resumed his dignified pacing. (78)

Though he is in a dark mood, the lieutenant is doing the right thing by silencing these

demoralizing and eventually superfluous comments. Too much talking about a bad

situation can only hurt morale and make the situation worse. During the skirmish that

Henry ran from, "the words Lhat comrades had uttered previously to the firing began to

recur to him.... "What do they take us for-- why don't they send supports? I didn't come

here to fight the hull damned rebel army" (35-6). It is very possible that the echoing of

these demoralizing and exaggerated opinions is what drove Henry (and others) to flee. In

fact an entire brigade was quickly being sent in their support, and there were veteran

regiments on both of their flanks to help fight off the brief attack. But these undenied

22

comments become part of an intricate and deluded system of logic which overwhelms the

youth. This time the lieutenant curtly dismisses rumors of mismanagement, and even

offers a seemingly simple solution (fighting a little harder) to their problem. The phrase

"dignified pacing" is difficult to attribute-- to the narrator or to Henry-- but in either case it

reflects a growing admiration for the lieutenant.

In the next skirmish, Henry fights in an animal-like battle rage--fring long after the

enemy has withdrawn. Henry is complimented by the lieutenant, who calls him a

"wildcat," (81) and wishes he had more fighters like him. From now on there is a growing

"association" between Henry and Lieutenant Hasbrouck, who "always unconsciously

addressed himself to the youth" whenever "he had a particularly profound thought upon the

science of war" (81).

By this point the characteristic officer denunciation has shifted to a slightly higher,

more impersonal level. In a natural process of human integration, Henry (and apparently

many others) no longer blames those officers that he knows and sees, but shifts his

comments to higher and more faceless authorities. During the lull, Fleming and Wilson go

on an unsuccessful search for water. Returning, they overhear the division commander

ordering their new "cowboy riding" brigade commander to launch a spoiling attack against

the enemy.

"What troops can you spare?"The officer who rode like a cowboy reflected for an instant. "Well," he

said, "I had to order in th' 12th to help th' 76th, an' I ha- en't really got any. Butthere's th' 304th. They fight like a lot 'a mule drivers. I can spare them best ofany." (84)

The brigade commander smiles when, as he starts to leave, the general calls out in a sober

voice: "'I don't believe many of your mule drivers will get back"' (84). Henry is startled

to "learn suddenly that he was very insignificant," for the officer had spoken of the

regiment as if it were a "broom" and in a "tone properly indifferent to its fate." For Henry

"it was war, no doubt, but it appeared strange" (84). Much of Fleming's motivation and

23

anger during the anack will be aimed at some son of vindication to this "cowboy" officer.

As the regiment gets ready to charge, Fleming and Wilson look at each other.

They wen the only ones who possessed an inner knowledge. "Mule drivers-- hellt'pay-- don't believe many will get back." It was an ironical secret Still. theysaw no hesitation in each other's faces, and they nodded a mute and unprotestingassent when a shaggy man near them said in a meek voice: "We'll git swallowed."(85)

This is a teling point for both Fleming and Wilson. Both an very willing to atack in spite

of their knowledge of de anack's poor probability of success. Whether it is pride, anger,

or concern for each's opinion of the other, this willingness seems to mark them as mon

seasoned than green.

The officers quickly get the men "into a mon compact mass and into better

ahgnment." chasing "those that suagled" like "critical shepherds st'iggling with sheep"

(85). When the atack falven from exhausion and fe., the oaring of the lieutenant nses

above the sounds of outside comoton.... his infantile featues black with rage":

"Come on. yeh fools!" he bellowed. "Cone on! Yeh can't stay hen. Yehmust come on." He said mom. but much of it could not be underooxd.

He sr-sed rapidly forwd. with hi head turied w vwus the men. "Comeon.- he was shouting. The men swed with blank and yokel-like eyes at him Hewas obliged to hah and retiace his steps. He sood then with his bk to the enemyand deliveed ipntc cuves into the faces of the men. His body vibraied fom thrweight and fone of his unrecabons. e could g oath with te facility of amaiden who mngs beads. (87-)

The liusenam seems o be one o( the major monvamng faciors for the whole regiment. H

is certainy foUowg the prmnry dictn o( ufantry kadershp: Follow me!" At each

hakng swop. he umes "coing. beran, and badamnwng." Once agan he associas with

Hem"w. grabbing has arm: Comse on' Well all git killed if we stay hem. We've on'y got

p' go c that IoL' With 'unspeakable indignaton" Henry shakes ham off, then.

-XCmm on vervelf th - he ye~is, with a bitr challenF in his voice" (8-9). As they

- -aloe wtoie downa the muiepnW frst t flag wi the the 'diiqaaaed

rpmam seqpd forwar" (39. But when the cokff bearer is hit and Flm ig and Wilson

wn-ale o'w *w fag the sk nops md -aru'ibed away " The yelling of the officr

24

reaches a crescendo: -11er was a Me of screeches, in which the men were ordered to

do conflicting and impossible things" (90). At this point the officers have lost contrul, and

in the confusion of rying to get the men going forward again, their incoherent yelling only

serves to confuse the situation. The regiment is simply nc cohesive enough yet to

continue such a difficult mission.

Most of the regiment falls back to a line of nPes:

However, the mar of the regiment was fringed with men, who continued toshoot irritably at de advancing foes. They seemed resolved to make every trouble.The youthful lieutenant was perhaps the last man in the disordered mass. Hisforgotten back was towards the enemy. He had been shot in the arm. It hungtraight and rigid. Occasionally he would cease to remember it. and be about toemphasize an oath with a sweeping gesture. he multiplied pain caused him toswear with incredible power. (91)

This is an imporant juxtaposition. The frst time that Hasbouck is wounded (in the hand)

he holds it away from him trying to keep the blood off of his uniform. Then he argues

with the captain about how to dress it. But now, his noe seriously wounded arm hangs

forgotten at his side, so concerned is he with the unit. and with setting the soldiers to do

the right thing, It is a juxtaposition of initially personal concerns with the eventually noe

1nature group considentios which come to totally ovenhadow his personal ones. It is the

movement from pivate to unit ronskiatiot . He has inersed himself in the group

effort., and his individual selflessness has become his "greatest virtue."

As the sack fails, Henry, recognizing that he will not have his revenge on the

Brigadier for the "mule driven" label, "wrapped his heart in the cloak of his pride and kept

the flag erect" (91). With the lieutenant he "halngued his feows":

Between him and the lieutenant. scolding and near to losing his mind with rage,them was felt a subtle fellowship and equality. They supported each othdr in allmanner of hoe, howling poests. (91)

Henry has now identified with the uut's olTcers, particularly with Lieutenant Hasbrouck.

They have become, in a sense, parmne.

25

As the regiment stops, "the officers labored like politicians to beat the mass into a

proper circle to face the menaces" (92). Just then the temporarily silent lieutenant bawls

out: "'Here they come! Right onto us, b'Gawd!'" (93). An advancing enemy force, not

knowing that the regiment is there, has chanced into their position. With only the warning

shout, and with encouragement unnecessary, the blue regiment lashes out with all of its

pent-up rage at this vulnerable enemy; "they seized upon the revenge to be had at close

range" (93). When the enemy is driven off, many have "an ungainly dance of joy" at their

successful skirmish, which snowed they were not "itpoqent" and that the "impetus of

enthusiasm was theirs again" (94).

Through the jeering of the veteran regiments, they return to their original lines.

Immediately the "cowboy" riding brigade commander reigns in sharply next to Colonel

MacChesnay and "exploded in reproaches which came unbidden to the ears of the men"

who were "always curious about black words between officers":

"Oh, thunder, MacChesnay, what an awful bull you made of this thing!" began theofficer. He attempted low tones, but his indignation caused certain of the men tolearn the sense of his words. "What an awful mess you made! Good Lord, man,you stopped about a hundred feet this side of a very pretty success! If your men

had gone a hundred feet farther you would have made a great charge, but as it is-what a lot of mud diggers you've got anyway!" (96)

The colonel straightens out and puts forward one hand in "oratorical fashion." Wearing an

"injured air" he seemed like a deacon "accused of stealing."

But all of a sudden the colonel's manner changed from that of a deacon to that of aFrenchman. He shrugged his shoulders. "Oh, well, general, we went as far as wecould," he said calmly.

"'As far as you could? Did you, bGawd?" snorted the other. "Well, thatwasn't very far, was it?" he added, with a glance of cold contempt into the other'seyes. Not very far, I think. You were intended to make a diversion in favor of

Whiterside. How well you succeeded your own ears car now tell you." (96)

The lieutenant, in an "impotent rage," comments to the colonel,"in firm and undaunted

tones":

26

"I don't cam what a man is-- whether he is a general or what-- if he says th' boysdidn't put up a good fight out there he's a damned fool."

"Lieutenant," began the colonel severely, "this is my own affair, and ['Utrouble you-"

The lieutenant made an obedient gesture. "All right, colonel, all right,"he said. He sat down with an air of being content with himself. (96)

This scene is very different from the last time that Colonel MacChesnay was angrily

addressed by a general officer. The first time, when savagely told: "you've got to hold 'em

back!" MacChesnay had stammered in his agitation. He had regarded "his men in a highly

resentful manner," as if he "regretted" his "association" with them (30). MacChesnay no

longer regrets this association with his regiment. He starts to reply with a deacon's oration-

-the injured air of an improperly accused thief-but instead explains gamIy that they did as

well as they could. From our knowledge of the conversation between division and brigade

commanders, and since the brigade commander says that they wea only a "hundred feet

short" of "very pretty success," we can infer that the regiment has done as well as, if not

better than, the brigade commander expected when he labeled them expendable "mule

drivers." The brigade commander is clearly upset-but perhaps this is disappointment that

they came so close to success, rather than any original expectation that they would succeed

when he selected them for the attack.

When Lieutenant Hasbrouck tries to offer encouragement to the Colonel about the

general's criticism, MacChesn.y makes a wonderful reply, to butt out, since "this is my

own affair." He accepts the complete responsibility for the failure- he does not pass it

down to the men, regretting his association with them. He simply, calmly, and effectively

takes responsibility for everything his unit does or fails to do, without complaint or attempt

at extenuation. The acceptance of full responsibility is one of the highest traits that a good

commander can have. It encourages and protects the unit from unnecessary or unfair

criticism. It is a lesson the new brigade conmander could take a page from--by keeping

his temper and never correcting a subordinate in front of his men. The economy of this

scene makes it a remarkable description of moral courage and military professionalism. Its

27

effectiveness rests on the brevity and the sharpness of images juxtaposod. the stammering,

regretful colonel from the day before; the immature and unprofessional "cowboy" riding

brigade commander, and the calm and responsible regimental commander of that day.

During the next and final skirmish of the novel, the lieutenant, returning from a

bandage search, "produced from a hidden receptacle of his mind new and portentous oaths

suited to the emergency" until it "was evident that his previous efforts had in nowise

impaired his resources" (100-1). Then a large body of the enemy attacks and seizes a good

position of fence line opposite the regiment and begins to "slice" them up. Although the

regiment quickly volleys without waiting for a superfluous word of command, the more

exposed blue "regiment bled extravagantly." Henry looks first at Wilson, then at his

lieutenant:

The lieutenant, also, was unscathed in his position at the rear. He had continued tocurse, but it was now with the air of a man who was using his last box of oaths.

For the fire of the regiment had began to wane and drip. The robust voice,that had come strangely from thin ranks, was growing rapidly weak. (102)

This is a critical moment. The lieutenant has exhausted his primary leadership tool-- new

and exciting oaths-- and like the rest of the regiment is at the end of his rope. "The men

recalled the fact that they had been named mud diggers, and it made their situation thrice

bitter" (101). Now, with even the most aggressive officer down to "using his last box of

oaths," it appears that the "rejoicing body of the enemy" will be successful But then:

The colonel came running along beck of the line. There were other officersfollowing him. "We must charge 'W!" they shouted. "We must charge 'Im!" theycried with resentful voices, as if anticipating a rebellion against this plan by themen. (102)

Henry (and the officers) expect resistance from the soldiers to an attack. but he "pemcved

with a certain surprise that they were giving quick and unqualified expressions of assent"

Recognizing, as Henry does, that it "would be death to stay," their only "hope was to

push the galling foes away fomr the fence." With a "new and unexpecltd force im de

movement of die regiment," dey attack into the "fierce rifles of (del anuy" (102-3) mad

28

scatter them. At the critical point of the battle, when the exhausted leaders ae unable to do

anything more, it is the regiment's newest self-confident leader, Colonel MacChesnay,

who turns the tide from defeat to victory for the volunteers of the 304th. In a remarkable

culmination of maturation under conditions of fearful combat, the once stutteing

regimental commander makes the decision to attack. It is an action which completes the

regiment's journey from the ranks of the untried to those of the tested. 11

Hasbrouck also has a final positive accolade, an accolade which Henry now

accepts. As they mranh back towards the river, the men were "plodding in ragged array,

discussing with quick tongues the accomplishments of the late battle." One snatch of

overheard conversation (completing a sort of circle) is about the "mere brute lieutenant:

"lHasbrouck? He's th' best off'cer in this here reg'ment. He's a whale'" (108). Henry

has come to agree with the unidentified speaker about Hasbrouck's good points. Henry's

growing association with Hasbrouck has led him to both praise of and identification with

the lieutenant, and the unit he represents. Although Hasbrouck does not undergo the

same dramatic maturation process as that of MacOiesnay, his immersion in the collective

welfare marks him as an important figure in the unit's journey to self realization on the hot

forge of battle.

Stephen Crane has provided the novel with a structural pattern within which an

individual private experiences battle. The use of military units as a framework within

which Heny develops- particularly the regiment of which he is a member- serves an

imortant guide to his progression. The regiment is depicted as growing from an

ineFpiec.ed mob of voluni r to a wlU run and wasoned military organization with

pueonal and competwnt officers. The inportance of an organization to the individual

privie is obvious, the eprience of individuals in battle being inseparable from their

cOMtex The rempent and the private reflect significandy upon each other. Just as the

wePmem h taught Henry about the impartance of immersion into the group effort, so has

29

Henry inspired his comrades. Edwin Cady, in his book phwane, explains how the

"realist" writers "saw life as a continuum of personal experiences" where the writer "broke

in upon its flow at one significant point and left it at another" (141). Cady believes that at

the end Henry is "neither a hero nor a villain" but has to "assume the burdens of a mixed,

embattled, impermanent, modest, yet prevailing humanity" (142). Ralph Ellison, in

Sha~w aM writes that "although Henry has been initiated into the battle of life, he

has by no means finished with illusion-- but that, too, is part of the human condition"

(Pizer "Guide to Criticism" 154). Like the regiment, Henry will have other experiences, he

has gained much, but his experience is not yet complete. A couple of days, even as full as

these have been, cannot make him a complete man. His progression has had its share of

illusions and delusions, and he will probably have a few more in the future, but his

growing maturity will stand him in good stead. It seems unlikely that he will flee again in

terror before the "gray coats" like the "startled rabbits, squirrels, and quail." He is now a

member of Conrad's "tried body of men" who are "matured in achievement" and who are

conscious of its "worth" (192). The 304th New York is clearly a better organization, and

Henry's experiences with it are proof that he is better too.

30

Notes

1 The now well accepted conclusion that Crane used the battle of Chancellorsvillefor the setting of the novel is conclusively argued by Harold Hungerfod, in "'That Was atChancellorsville': The Factual Framework of The Red Bad of CO He discussesCrane's use of The Battles and Lead-rs of the Civil War series as a source for technicalinformation. 'Frederick Crews' edition of the novel even provides maps and textual notesfor the references and allusions in the novel to the actual Chancelorsville campaign.Hungerford argues that Henry receives his wound from one of the Union sokliers whowere fleeing Jackson's surprise attack.

2 Since the 1960's, it seems to me that most of Redfiula criticism hascentred on finding the portrayal of Henry ironic and (often, by analogue, man in general)consistently self-deluded. An important part of this thesis has been the attack on thetraditional 1895 Appleton edition by Hershel Parker and his former students, Henry Binderand Steven Mailloux, who want to replace this, what they call "maimed text," with the"original form" from an almost complete Crane manuscript. This "original" text, accordingto them, is less ambiguous on the issue of Henry's development, making it "clearlyironic." The controversy is complicated, but deals with an incomplete manuscript thatCrane used to make revisions. The problem is that a number of passages not deleted in themanuscript, do not appear in the Apleton edition. It is possible that these deletions weremade by Crane at a later date, in a laer manuscript, or on gallery sheets; or that anAppleton editor, such as Ripley Hitchcock, made them or foned Crane to accept them.Parker and company believe that Appleton was responsible for the changes, and feeltherefom that the "original" manuscript most closely represents Crane's final intention forthe novel. In any case there has been stmng dissension about this replacement of theAppleton text. Many critics feel that this "original" manuscript is an important criticalresource, but not a replacement text unless mom subsutantial proof that Crane did not makethe changes can be found. The essays which argue for replacement of the 1895 Appletonedition ae: Henry Binder, "e Red BPigg of Courage that Nobody Knows"; StevenMailloux, "The Red d of Courage and Interpretive Conventions; Critical Response toa Maimed Text"; and Hershel Parker, "Getting Used to the 'Original Form' of 1mBRe

,. Many of the major critics onsided this manuscript during theirresearch over the years, and saw it as a stage in the novel's development. RobertStallman's Steubn Cr a and Edwin Cady's j , both provi'"detailed discusions of the textual probleau in a context prior go the cumrent debate. OlovFryckstedt's article and Joseph Katz in his Intrduction to the facsimile edition to the novelargue, with Stallmmn and Cady, that the deletions wem made by Crane and we beneficialto the novel. J.C. Levenson's Introduction to the Virguia Edition presens the fullestdiscussion of the revisions and excisions of the novel. Fially, I age with Donald Pizer'sessay "Te Red Badge of Courm_, Nobody Knows': A Brief Rejoinder" which aruesthat the Appleton text is authoritative, and is not incoherent as Binder and others believe.(Puw has since been joined by Wortham, Covic and Dunn in this position of arguing forthe coherence of the "traditional" text.)

31

3 For a good discussion of the problem of Crane's relationship to Henry Flemingat the close of the novel see Donald Per's bibliographic article in the Norton CriticalEdition of the novel (Bradley). He has an updated essay, "Stephen Crane: A Review ofScholarship and Criticism since 1969," which covers from 1969 to 1975 (and some 1976-77 items). Pizer identifies that a major difficulty is Crane's use of irony. Here, it seemsto me, it is a question of the traditional acceptance of Henry's estimate of himself as a manversus the newer school which holds that the endin; is another iroic depiction of his(Henry's or man's in general) ability for "self-delusion." Another school believes thatCrane s characterization of Henry is "consciously or unconsciously ambivalent" (Pizer152). Critics like Charles Walcutt argue that the novel is a "study of man's ability todelude himself under any circumstances" (153). On the other hand, R.W. Stallmanbelieves that "Henry undergoes a sacramental experience" through the "nxienmpveexperience" offered by Jim Conklin's death, and that 1k8JLflhdU is representative of anovel of initiation and maturity into manhood (Pizer 153). Other, naturalistic, critics suchas James Cox and Marton LaFrance argue that "Henry progresses from a romantic visionof the world to an awareness that man lives in a hostile and godless universe" (154). Manyscholars am very concerned with the ambiuity of the endin# of the novel. JohnBerryman, Mordecai Marcus, and James Colvert arue that Crane could not make up hismind.., or was deluded," and often cite the conclusion as "flawed" (Pizer 155).

4 Critical studies of the influence of European writers on Crane's work ame veryambitious. The primary one that links Crane with Tolstoy and Zola is Las Ahnebrink'sThe Beginnings of Natralism in Amein Fiction_ 1891-1903 (Cambridge: Harvard UP,1950) Rpt (New York: Russell & Russell, 1961). James Colvert points out in his essay"Stephen Crane" in .,mer.Bn IimndNAUIaMfia Volume 12 of the Diction ofLiterary Biography, which will breferred to subsequently as "DLB," that Crane had madTolstoy's novel about the Crimean war, and while at Lafayette College in 1890 hadventured to say that Tolstoy was the "world's greatest writer" (102). Colvert continues:

During this time [1891-21 he was also working out a theory of an, evidently basingit partly on theories of realism advanced by Hamlin Carland and William Dean

Howells, partly on ideas expressed by the realist painter-hero of Kipling's novelS.mLigha aEW (1891), and parly on the practical demonstration of the usesof irony and the handling of psychological realism in Tolstoy's SmkuaL (102)

Also useful to this paper is V. S. Pritchett's The Living Novel (New York, 1947),which argues that the European war novels had a general influence on Crane, and did notprovide a specific source. More recently, J.C. Levenson in his introduction to the secondvolume of the Virginia Edition, expands Ahnebrink's thesis, that Tolstoy's kkam is a"major source." [See also note 10 for a separate discussion of Homeric influences on Tk

5 This list of similarities is drawn from Webster, but is supplemented by bothStanley Wertheim's a Red Badae of Co and Personal Narratives of the CivilWar." AmericnLiterary Realism 1870-1910.61 (Winter 1973): page 61, and DLB pages108-10.

32

6 Thle most important proposals for soiircs from Civil war novels are: H.T.Websuer, essay "Wilbur Hinman'sjji.Klg and Stephen Crane's IbLBm1

~" Thomas F. 0~rn U's I" Forest. Van lPetten. and Stephen Crane"which links Crane with John William De Fores's * 11.%&c~uzLMIYx (1867) and Own's waacher asClavaack m'ilitary school (General VanPetten. who was a veteran of ChanceUmrville). Robert Stalbisnn Qmwnn -sAnQuibu also discusses Van Petlen; Eric Solomon's essay "Another Analogue for ]3M

- Coul~ma=" links it Io Joseph Kirkland's 3Ikfwaain Qany.XLAlexander Tamike's essay -Mi Principal Source of Stephen Cnine's Lsa iCam=" trie wisuccesafuly io demonstrate that Kiuklancra novel is not only ananalogue. but the major source for Quee war novel. Ambrose Biaere'sIaaik uani(18s ( 9 1) also has veyralistic batlsenes. Eric Soklon's chapter "ADefinition of dhe War Novel" in offen a goods-mwy of die discussion of dhe "reiic" Civil War novels by Kirkland, De Forest. andBierce.

7 Wetheinmot wanymt examples am: Alonzo F. Hill's QmL11a (1864),John Bumpng'Umkjag dCaft U).Wat Lee Gass' af a ta rvAML

The~~~~~~~ Sa8 fdeAm fde~s 190). and Frank Wilkermon's 9~aQ~kc aAPri SqAttir in dP Amyo dieamml (1887) which "Howelis considered one of thebest books ever writen about dhe Civil War" (63' .

8 The list of elernem fivm proa enmives is primarily from DLB 106 pop106-10. but I addied oo it ft~m Werhim'sartcle (61- 2).

9 There am four msWunotn discussions of Homeric perallels tn Siephien Crmeswork: 11* bes a Warren D. Anderson. 'Hom e d Stp. Crane - MiiMIaanhEGO 19.1 (Jun 1964): 77 -S& A secnd is Rabart Dmsenibert - MUMe Hcxz Mood in

Nebraska P, 1Q63) is a coVmple book lengt s&Ay. And finally N.E. Dsum. -MCommon Man's A~. Cgaab~tglii 213 0(964): 27041. Wotfordoffers a good review of the aHkniec puakes as pqp zi- x Alam Dwm. 7 2. fora sumwy of duuenm m pof dfbeeabes u e chskw us 'eschwork.

10 For cxn m i a camy of unisy extbsm i book drill hdw inprovue dke Gart Sm wash mp d stccs butm w am of Few i[Tk

Gn)i Chedor 3iks ovwn of Aissu Eoqmu so amly seven weeks um186& For a dwusei of die isii of the, IM0 01lomof*dl a boo. sed isGemy apaidy. we die Dqm b ahm s- On 610 iry Fmisekrads 'sb wGsstavwaA&Efus udam6111%d 'swet ackuse oder hn Formwof hsods bas- 64-4mnd 66&-73. (diermul siewem w Fmoie m sppes64soi6731

Fcr a '-usa ci , no an ve MlaMe's bnlhit a " 01%11 iini. n d ea

aome iffi? COMM am d W=Q 6&Iam eo 24

33

hi T scone also echo s in an interesting way a regimental charge of the 20thMaine on the Little Round Top at Gettysburg, which makes a quiet, introverted professorof rhetoric and religion at Bowdoin College a national hero and eventually one of the mostbeloved governors of Maine. Told to hold at all costs, Joshua Chamberlain commands thelast unit in the line at the critical Little Round Top on the second day. Surrounded on threesides by attacking Confederate regiments, bent at an unbelievable angle, and ammunitionexhausted by numerous attacks, Joshua Chamberlain orders an attack which sweeps off thehill, crushes the Confederate attack and routs Longstreet's entire right flank. It is the mostunexpected and celebrated event of the entire battle at Gettysburg. While the 304th NewYork's charge can hardly be compared to the 20th Maine's, it is interestingly similar andunexpected. The best description of Chamberlain's battle is in the Pulitzer Prize winningnovel KiLerAng c, by Michael Shaara (New York: Ballantine, 1974).

34

Works Cited

Anderson, Warren. "Homer and Stephen Crane." Nineteenth Qen Hftin 19.1 (1964):77-86.

Bradley, Sculley, et ia., eds. The Red Bade of Courage: An Authoritative Text- ByStephen Crane. 2nd eds. New York: Norton, 1976.

Cady, Edwin. . Twayne's United States Authors Series 23. New York:Twayne Publ, 1962.

Colvert, James. "Origins of Stephen Crane's Literary Creed" University of Texas Studiesin .najli,. 34 (1955): 179-88. Rpt in Bradley 131-40.

- "Stephen Crane." ,American Realists and NangrliM. Ed. Donald Pizer. Dictionary ofLiterary Biography, 12. Detroit: Gale, 1982.

Conrad, Joseph. "His War Book: A Preface to Stephen Crane's The Red Bdit, ofCow=." LA&mW. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday, 1926. 119-24. Rpt.in Bradley 190-4.

Crane, Stephen. The Red Badgc of Courage: Authcritative Text Ed Bradley, Sculley, etIa. A Norton Critical Edition. 2nd ed. New York: Norton, 1976.

Pizer, Donald. "Stephen Crane." Fifteen American Authors Before 1900. Ed. Robert Reesand Earl Harbert. Madison: Univ of Wisconsin Press, 1971. 111-27. Rpt as"Crane and The Red Badge of Coura : A Guide to Criticism." Bradley 143-56.

- "Stephen Crane: A Review of Scholarship and Criticism since 1969." s inthNvel. This is in a special Stephen Crane edition of the magazine. 10.1 (1978):120-45.

Vanderbilt, Kermit, and Daniel Weiss. "From Rifleman to Flagbeamr." ModeictionSflldi 11 (Winter 1965-66): 371-80. Rpt in Bradley 285-93.

Webster, H.T. "Wilbur F. Hinman's £1 r Si Klea, and Stephen Crane's 3bLRediMI. gLQamLg." ,merican IAteranire 11.3 (Nov 1939): 285-93.

Wertheim, Stanley. 'Mhe Red Badgc of Courage and Personal Narratives of the CivilWar." Anerican Literary Realism 1870-1910. 6.1 (Winter 1973): 61-5.

35

Se~lcted ist of[ Works Consulted

Aaron. Daniel. The Unwritten War: Amrican Writers and the Civil War. New York,1973.

Bassan, Maurice. Stephen Crame: A Cnllcinn of Critical Exays. Twentieth CenturyViews. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice, 1967.

Berryman, John. "Crane's Ar" S. New York: William Sloan, 1950. Rpt inBassan 27-5 1.

Binder, Henry. '"=n Red Badge of Coura that Nobody Knows." Studies in the Novel10.1 (1978): 9-47.

Breslin, Paul. "Courage and Convention: The Red Badgc of Courage." The )'ae Review

66 (1976): 209 22.

Brooke-Rose, Christine. "111 Logics of Irony." Mitchell, NwaXs 129 146.

Burhans, Clinton. '"Twin Lights on Henry Fleming: Structural Parailis in Il teiad=9MU ."11 *rna Quarterly 30.2 (1974): i49-59.

Cather, Willa "When I Knew Stephen Crane." Tke Uix 1 (June 1900). Rpt in Bassan12-17

Coivert, James. Introduction. Stephen Cranme; Taleks of War. By Stephen Cramne.Charlottesville: University Pess of Virginia, 1969. Vol. 6 of Ti L QWLo

phen an. Ed Fredson Bowers. 10 vols. 1969-76. xi-xxxvi.

Crane, Stephen. "The Price of the Harness." Gullason 507-20.

.The Second Generation." Gullason 636-52.

- 'The Upturned Face." Gullason 689-91.

"Virtue in War." Gullaon 614-24.

Delbnco, Ardrew. "The America Stephen Crane: The Context of Te Red BadgC ofCiag=." Mitchell, N 49-76.

Dunn, NE.. "The Comman Man's d CuzafJ L 21.3 (1984):270-81.

Fryckstedt, Olo' "Henry Fleming's Tupenny Fury: Cosmic Pessimism in IRL BjL.Cu ." S ,-33 (1961): 265-81. Rpt under the subtitle in

Bassan 141-45.

Gollin, Rita. "Little Souls Who Thirst fo, Fight in T B ,fa na." -aicdy30.2 (1974): 111-18.

36

Greenfield, Stanley. "The Unmistakable Stephen Crane." PLMA 73 (1958): 562-72. Rptin Bradley 222-32.

Gullason, Thomas. ed. The Complete Short Stories and Sketches of Stephen Crane..

Garden City, NJ.: Doubleday, 1963. "Introduction" 19-45.

"The Permanence of Stephen Crane." Studies in the Novel 10.1 (1978): 86-95.

Horsford, Howard. "'He Was a Man."' Mitchell, Nw Essays 109-128.

Hungerford, Harold. "'That Was at Chancellorsville': The Factual Framework of The RedBadg of Courag." American Literature 34 (Jan 1963): 520-31. Rpt in Bradley157-66.

Johnson, George. "Stephen Crane's Metaphor of Decorum." EMLA 78 (June 1963):250-6. Rpt in Bassan 67-79.

Kaplan, Amy. '"The Spectacle of War in Crane's Revision of History." Mitchell, Ne£Aun 77-108.

Katz, Joseph, ed. Introduction The Red Badge of Courae. The Portable Stephen Crane.by Stephen Crane. New York: Penguin, 1969.

Krauth, Leland. "Heroes and Heroics: Stephen Crane's Moral Imperative." Suxb~ak=Rview. 11 (Sununer 73): 86-93.

Kwiatt, Joseph. "Stephen Crane's Literary Theory: 'The Effort Born of Pain."' AmericanSudies 24 (1979): 152-6.

LaFrance, Marston. A Reading of Stephen Crane. Oxford: Clarendon, 1971.

Mailloux, Steven. 'The Red Badge of Courae and Interpretive Conventions: CriticalResponse to a Maimed Text." Studies in the Novel 10.1 (1978): 48-63.

Marcus, Mordecai. "The Unity of The Red Badge ot Courae." The Red Badge ofCourage: Text and Criticism Ed. Richard Lettis et la. New York: Harcourt, 1960.189-95. Rpt in Bradley 233-40.

Mitchell, Lee Clark. ""Naturalism and the Languages of Determinism." Caubnia LiteraryHistory of the United States. Ed. Emory Elliot. New York:Columbia UP, 1988,523-45.

Ed. NewEsaysxg The Red Badge of Courage. The American Novel Series.Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1986.

O'Donnell, Thomas. "DeForest, Van Petten, and Stephen Crane." American Lim=Ua 156)

Parker. Hershel- "Getting Used to the "Original Form" of The Red "adge of Couragc,"Mitchell, New uas 2548.

Perosa, Sergio. "Naturalism and Impressionism in Stephen Crane's Fiction." Annaidira:Fscd 3 (1964): 119-42. Rpt in Bassan 80-94.

3-

COmowcunt Modern ques Series C: Soutiem llinois UnivertyPres. 1966

'A Pruner o( Fcuonal Aetihcs" S.fagk& 3 (April 1969): 572-80.

I 1,st Bag o C,,.qk Text. T7fm. sand Form ." S,4 AL U O4

,,,,t adgr o Cnmm.e Nobody Knows*: A Brief Rejoinder."% ! I2'1') 7'7-81

Rectmz.. Robert Tkiermaluancm and the Dmam in n- , R-iageua."S0Ihc mn die Na 6 (Spmng 1974): 76-87. Rpt in Bradley 49-60.

RznoiKdLs Kirk -1k RMRadcf Om : Private Hlenrys Mind as Sole point of" Adm- .tkeview 5 1( 1987): 59-69.

Sadier, Frn 'Cranes% Tkemw': Appelsbon fbr Coar or Hero?" America

j4 4 (1976). 372-6.

'nokxwi -Eic i Cambridge: Harvard UP, 1967.

"J othr Analogue for TNe ,, Badge CfC'ra. Nietenth Centu Fcti . 13dui 19511k 63-7

.Juef R~t . "o wads Nanadihmu m Fcm iiterr lHisiay of the United Stms.Ed Robert Spdiler et La. 3rd ed. New York: Macmillan. 1963. 1016-38.

Stalhnimn. Robert Inoducacn." ,, . nmnih, New York: Knopf, 1961,175-224

"-%oss toward an Analysis of " Bassan 128-40.

am Mean. Jan -Sex and War. The R,, Bade C C-rm-: Cultural Themes andLierwv Crctum" GM7 (1974): 71-90.

Wlcku Chi ies n n D SChnug Minneapolis:Umvcuy of Minnesota Press, 1956.

wof Oe. The A skm" Cf Stejin Craiie: F nd the pic Tradirin. Licoln:Umvenasy of Nebraka Pire 1983.

Yommg. Ptalp. 'Crane and Hemingway." leminma. New York: Holt. 1952.Rm Bassan 52-6.

VITA

Timothy John Brotherton

.. .. Nominated to the United StatesMilitary Academy from Riverdale High School in Frt Myers, Florida. Graduated in May1981, and commissioned a second lieutenant in the US Infantry. Following assignmentsas platoon leader, operations staff officer, and company executive officer at Fort StewartGeorgia, and the Basic and Advanced infantry officer's courses at Fort Benning, reportedto the National Training Center in the Mojave desert as a member of the Opposing Force.After commanding the 2nd Guards Battalion (Bravo 1-52 Ink) for almost two years, wasselected as a potential instructor for the English Department at West Point, and sent to theCollege of:William and Mary under a two year advanced degree program. Awards include:Jump wings, Ranger tab, Expert Infantry badge, and the Meritorious Service MedaL Wll

begin teaching composition at the Military Academy in August 1990, to the Plebe class ofthe Corps of Cadets. -